John Lewis has been forced to withdraw its latest home insurance advertisement after the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) found it to be “potentially misleading and confusing.”
The retail giant’s Let Life Happen campaign features a young boy wearing his mother’s lipstick and clothes while dancing around the house to the tune of a Stevie Nicks song.
The boy then causes a mess as he kicks shoes at lamps, knocks vases off shelves, smears paint on the floor and walls, spills a glass of liquid, and jumps up on a table while throwing glitter as his surprised sister and mother just watch.
John Lewis posted on Twitter last Wednesday that it had pulled the advertisement because the FCA said the content could mislead and confuse customers about what is covered by home insurance.
“You may have seen our ‘Let Life Happen’ advert for our new home contents insurance offering, which ran between October 11 and 27, 2021,” the company said in a statement. “This advert has been withdrawn because the Financial Conduct Authority considers the content to be potentially misleading and could cause customers to be confused about John Lewis’s new home contents insurance offering.”
“This was absolutely never our intention,” the firm added. “The ‘Let Life Happen’ John Lewis home insurance advert was created to show a joyful depiction of a young actor getting carried away with his performance, oblivious of the unintentional consequences of his actions.”
The retail giant also clarified that accident damage coverage is an available add-on to its new home contents insurance policy and covers only accidental and not deliberate damage.
John Lewis said that it has contacted every customer who purchased the new policy from October 11-31 to confirm if they understood the inclusions and if they were happy with their purchase.
A spokesperson for the FCA told The Daily Mail that “financial services firms’ marketing must be clear, fair and not misleading.”
Before the financial watchdog’s decision, the ad had already caused a stir on social media, with some Twitter users saying it depicted “male entitlement” and “gender extremism,” while some accused the company of “agenda-pushing.”
